Curations around the Web
Learn and grow reading inspirations from around the web
2 members· by @olashoplife
8/14/2026, 1:42:00 PM
How T.L and Daisy Osborne took over Java, Indonesia with Jesus
PROOF FOR THE MUSLIMS in Java, Indonesia T. L. and Daisy headed for Java, where the population was ninety-five percent Muslim. Some of the Christians were frightened. They did not know if it was wise to go out on a public field and call thousands of Muslims together to talk to them about Jesus, pray for the sick, and expect miracles to confirm that Christ is alive. This was the first time that T.L. and Daisy preached to the Muslims with miracles in manifestation. They did not believe the Muslims were different from the Buddhists. The first night T. L. preached in Java, he thought it would be a good idea to tell the crowd that he did not expect them to accept Jesus unless they saw proof that He was risen from the dead. He believed that people were the same then as they were in Bible days, and needed to see proof that Jesus is alive. Otherwise, all he had to offer was a religion–a ritual, a tradition, a ceremony. In Java, he asked for anyone who was deaf in one ear to come to the platform. Quite a group responded, and each one was instantly healed as he and Daisy prayed for them. The very first person to respond was a Muslim teacher, a man about sixty years old. He was born with one ear totally deaf and had never heard out of it in his entire life. T. L. told the people that if the man’s ear did not come open, they would know that he was a false teacher, and that Jesus Christ had not risen from the dead as the Bible claims. He explained that if Jesus is alive, He would make Himself known. He would do the same miracles that He had done before He was crucified. There were over one hundred pastors on the platform. They said, afterwards, that they were frightened about what the multitude might do if that Muslim teacher was not healed. They viewed T. L.’s action as extreme, radical, and a dangerous challenge–even careless and near-irresponsible. T. L. started to put his hand on the man’s ear, but never touched him. The man did not even stand very close to T. L., as T. L. simply stretched his hand toward him. He did not want the people to think that there was something mystical about his touch, or that he had some strange power. T. L. wanted the Javanese to realize that Jesus Christ was there in their presence. While at other times he would touch the sick and lay hands on them, he wanted these people to understand that this was the power of the living Jesus, who, though He had been crucified, was alive again and was present in that meeting. His and Daisy’s position was simple and seemed totally logical to him, If Jesus is alive, He will do the same things that He did before they killed Him. But if He is dead, He can do no miracle and His name has no power. There were two things that Daisy later shared about that instance: “One was that my husband did not touch the man, and the other was that he did not close his eyes.” Usually T. L. would bow his head, close his eyes, and ask the people to do the same, but he wanted that Moslem teacher to believe that Jesus Christ is alive. He wanted everyone to witness that he was doing nothing mystical. That is why he did not ask the people to close their eyes. He wanted them to watch everything he did. Looking at the Moslem teacher, he said, “In the name of Jesus Christ, whom God has raised from the dead according to the Scriptures–Jesus who is the Son of the Living God–I adjure the deaf spirit to leave your ear; and I command your ear to hear now, so that all here may know that the Bible is true, that Jesus is the Son of God, that His blood was shed for the remission of our sins, and that He is risen from the dead to be the Savior of the world. Amen.” T. L. later shared that he spoke with authority and that the Holy Spirit was present. When I finished, you could hear a pin drop. It was an apostolic moment. Across that field was total silence. Then I pulled the man to me. I stopped up his good ear and faintly whispered in his deaf ear, and he jumped. He repeated every word. I told him, “Say what I say, and say it out loud.” He agreed. Then I made him confess what the Bible says about Jesus. I said, “Jesus is the Son of God.” He said, “Jesus is the Son of God.” I said, “He must be risen from the dead.” He repeated, “He must be risen from the dead.” “By that time,” Daisy later reported, “he [the Muslim] was weeping.” As the man broke into tears, the crowd started clapping; and I think the preachers on the platform were greatly relieved. Then I turned to the multitude to help them accept Christ, asking them, “Now, is Jesus Christ alive; or is He dead?” Being called upon to make a decision, thousands raised their hands to accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. This was probably the greatest gospel demonstration in all of the history of Christian evangelism in Java up to that time. T. L. and Daisy stayed there for several weeks, preaching, teaching, and praying, day after day, conducting two or three meetings per day. Someone who had been unable to talk for four years was healed instantly. Someone unable to walk for fifteen months was completely healed. Someone totally deaf for many years was miraculously healed. Dreadfully Infected, Running Sores. “Lepers are being healed, blind are seeing, and cripples are walking at the airfield!” That is what one man heard in the streets and in the marketplace, as he edged around the people so he wouldn’t be noticed, because he was a leper. For years, he had been tortured with the shame of being unclean. His nose, ears, upper lip, and gradually his feet, hands, and arms had become dreadfully infected. Running sores covered his feet and hands. In this condition, he sought out the place where such unbelievable reports were coming from. As he approached the grounds, he saw other lepers and all manner of sick people: some being carried, some being led, and others, as himself, staying on the edge of the multitude and all alone. The very first night he attended, he was instantly and perfectly healed. The sores dried up, all swelling and deadness left, and he was clean and whole. - T.L Osborn ( Legacy of Faith ) Copied from Spiritual Notes
7/30/2026, 2:02:47 PM
Mark Zuckerberg Post on the Future of Superintelligence
We are fortunate to live at an incredible moment in history. In the next few years, people will be able to use superintelligence beyond human capacity to create and discover extraordinary new things, build new businesses, express our ideas, learn new concepts, and improve our lives, health, relationships and careers. The defining question of our age isn’t whether superintelligence will exist, but who will have access to it. Will it be centralized and restricted to a few institutions, or will it be a tool that empowers everyone? I propose a philosophy based on individual empowerment as the source of prosperity, invention as the primary purpose of superintelligence, and balance of power as the foundation of safety. It is surprising that the discourse from many of those who are developing artificial intelligence is so filled with doom. I don’t understand why anyone who believes that AI will eliminate most jobs and much of humanity’s relevance would rush to build that future. The notion that AI is so dangerous that the only safe path is an extreme concentration of power seems dangerous. Historically, hoping that an absolute power will benevolently provide for humanity if sufficiently enlightened hasn’t led to safe or positive outcomes. Humanity has witnessed many transformative advances. Each time there is fear that people will be left behind. But each time humanity has come out with more people sharing greater prosperity, health and freedom. We believe this will be true with AI as well, and the abundance of the future can be shared by everyone. We also believe that the values that got us to this point—liberty, open inquiry, free enterprise and equal opportunity—are also the values to build a positive future. Putting power in people’s hands to pursue their own aspirations is how humanity has made the most progress. Novel ideas and major steps forward rarely originate from established institutions alone. They came from the brothers in a bicycle shop who believed people could fly, the bookbinder’s apprentice with no schooling who figured out how to generate electricity, and the kid in a garage who thought personal computers could be for everyone. We believe this will continue to be true. As everyone gains more powerful tools, each person will become more capable of shaping the future, not less. Invention, not automation, will be the greatest contribution of superintelligence. Early AI could answer questions and do routine work. Soon it will increasingly help discover new knowledge—from discovering new drugs to cure a family member’s disease to finding new ways to improve your business. While the number of questions you can ask in a day is limited, the number of valuable things superintelligence can invent to help achieve your goals is unlimited. As intelligence becomes abundant, the most important question will be how we direct it. Some argue that superintelligence itself, or a small set of experts who control it, should decide what is best for humanity. I disagree. The history of democracy and economics has shown that there is no single objective answer to how people define the best life, and therefore the best approach is letting people decide what matters to them. Rather than centralizing this power, we believe that delivering personal superintelligence to everyone is the way to answer this question. This has the potential to begin a new era of personal empowerment, in which individuals have greater freedom to pursue their interests and reach their full potential. Healthy societies also recognize that safety requires checks and balances. If only a handful of institutions have superintelligence, they will inevitably exercise a controlling influence over economics, science and politics. Even with the best intentions, that concentration would limit people’s ability to choose their own future. As a thought experiment, imagine only one person had a superintelligent lawyer. He would have an unfair advantage in court—even if his position was wrong on the merits. That would lead to a worse society. But now imagine everyone has a superintelligent lawyer. Justice would be carried out much more fairly and efficiently than it is today. When people are empowered, they naturally check and balance each other and the power of larger institutions. Most societal questions can’t be solved by attempting to align a single benevolent superintelligence. Humanity isn’t a monoculture. There is no technological solution that can align with everyone’s opposing interests and diverse values at once. Any singular superintelligence would have to prioritize some values over others and in the process would be incapable of being benevolent to everyone. Many risks require serious attention. In most cases, like cybersecurity, the history of open-source software has shown that giving everyone full access to powerful systems will be the best way to protect safety and security over time. For other risks, including biological risks, more coordination between governments and other institutions on responsibly deploying capable models will be helpful. This applies to the economy and the future of jobs as well. There is a balance between the use of AI as a tool for automation versus as a tool for empowering people to expand their skills and build new businesses. If the balance leans toward automation, the impact on jobs and the economy may be negative. But if superintelligence is widely distributed, then I believe we will see more jobs in the future, not fewer. It will be significantly easier to start businesses without raising large amounts of capital. I expect the economy will become more entrepreneurial with a greater number of people working at small businesses rather than larger companies. Developing superintelligence will be the most profound technological advance we will see in our lifetimes. Meta is committed to building with the principles of individual empowerment, invention and balance of power. The arc of human history has bent toward putting more power in people’s hands. If these values lead the way, then I am optimistic that we can build a positive future for everyone. Mr. Zuckerberg is CEO of Meta.
6/9/2026, 11:03:51 AM
Sometimes, indifference and neglect are better weapons than aggression against your enemy
↻ Repost